George Proud

[Petitions, June 10th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to present a petition on behalf of some islanders.

These constituents are urging parliament to remove the GST from books, magazines and newspapers. They believe taxing reading material is unfair and wrong. As well they believe that removing the GST from reading material will help promote literacy in Canada.

[Cancer, June 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the House that Sunday, June 7 is national cancer survivors day in Canada.

As my colleagues may be aware, one in three Canadians will be diagnosed this year. Sometimes it seems like that rate is even higher in P.E.I. I have too often seen the intense suffering cancer inflicts on its victims but today, thanks to improved detection methods, more available information and enhanced methods of treatment, more than half of all people with cancer will survive the disease.

The Canadian Cancer Society is planning activities to elevate the importance and profile of this day throughout Canada. I encourage everyone to celebrate life, honour our survivors and recognize the important role of others in the lives of survivors.

I commend the Canadian Cancer Society for its continuing work in helping combat cancer and raise public awareness of this devastating disease.

[Students, May 15th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, spring flowers are now in full bloom but I am not speaking about the flowers like the thousands of tulips around this fair city. I am referring to all the graduating students throughout our nation.

Our students are much like flowers. First we prepare the soil as a food rich base. As the flowers grow we take care by watering them and then beautiful colourful blooms reward our efforts.

For our students the soil is their educational institutions. The water is our assistance such as Canada student loans, the various tax credits or some 60,000 annual summer student jobs. Soon we will offering some 100,000 millennium scholarships each and every year starting in the year 2000. At the end we are rewarded with highly educated participants in the workforce, the blooms of our labour force.

I congratulate all the students in my riding of Hillsborough on their graduation. May all their colours shine through as they enter the labour force.

[Supply, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his questions. There is no doubt, and I have heard it many times in my office as I know he has heard it in his, that people have experienced this breakdown in communications and, for want of a better word, this turf protection between the two departments.

I listened to members from veterans affairs the day before yesterday as they appeared before our committee along with a liaison officer from the Department of National Defence. There are still problems with people who are injured in the forces who then leave the forces and come under the Department of Veterans Affairs. However, I am confident this is being overcome. It is not 100% yet. There is no doubt there is a long road to go.

The member talked about different doctors, one from national defence and another from veterans affairs, examining the same person. These things must be overcome and they are being overcome as we go down this road. As this communication continues, as a result of a number of investigations by the committee, by the McLellan report and others, I believe it will be much easier for people leaving the forces to get veterans affairs benefits than it has been in the past. That is not to say it is right and all fixed by any stretch of the imagination.

However, I am confident from what I have heard in the last week that the changes being made are real and that people are very serious about making this transition as seamless as possible.

[Supply, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, numerous bases have been closed over the last number of years, Chilliwack among them. A lot of bases were closed, but the really big hits took place on the east coast of Canada. The air base in my own province of Prince Edward Island was closed in 1989. These things have been going on since the end of the second world war. Many of these bases were out of date and no longer needed.

As far as the Canadian forces' being able to get to British Columbia, there will be no problem with that. As I said in my speech, we have already sent troops to Italy. I am sure if we can send them to Italy we can certainly send them to British Columbia a lot faster.

As far as the naval base in Prince Edward Island is concerned, it has been ongoing for a number of years. It was through this government that we finally got the money to complete it. This was promised long and ever ago. It is now in place on the east coast. It is a very good naval base. I believe that Prince Edward Island and all other provinces deserve to have a military presence.

[Supply, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Peterborough.

I am very pleased this afternoon to address this motion on the government's leadership with respect to the Canadian forces. I believe that the government has indeed shown tremendous leadership.

Last year the then Minister of National Defence published his report to the Prime Minister. That report, along with Chief Justice Dickson's report on military justice, contained 100 recommendations on how the Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces should move forward to change, to improve and to restore the pride and sense of purpose of the forces.

These reports recommended that action be taken in areas such as military discipline, value and ethics, leadership, the command and rank structure, operational missions, terms and conditions of service, the national headquarters and relations with the Canadian public.

The very comprehensive nature of these changes reflects the extent of the challenges we were facing. At that time the Department of National Defence and the forces were emerging from turbulent years. There were challenges to respond to successive budget cuts, personnel reductions and a very active slate of operations both at home and abroad.

Intense public scrutiny was taking its toll and resulted in the leadership, discipline, command and management, and even the honour of the Canadian forces being called into question. But since that time the Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces have been very busy implementing these recommendations and putting in place many other initiatives.

Before I describe those initiatives I would like to briefly mention some of the many initiatives the government took during its first mandate.

In 1994 the government established the special joint committee on Canada's defence policy of which I was a member. In response to that valuable report the government wrote the 1994 white paper on Canada's defence policy.

In 1995 it was this government that established the commission on restructuring the reserves. I am proud to say that I was chairman of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs when we reviewed that commission's report. Since then the government has made numerous achievements in implementing necessary changes.

Closer to home, I wish to commend the minister for his commitment to Prince Edward Islanders when he announced the construction of a new naval reserve base in my riding of Hillsborough. This new base is now up and running and is recognition of the islanders' unwavering support for the Canadian forces.

I might just say that in 1939, the day war was declared, every one of the members of the HMCS Queen Charlotte volunteered for active duty.

Before I get carried away with the countless past initiatives, I should revert to the most recent examples of how the government has shown excellent leadership. To begin with, there is almost entirely a new leadership team. Solid leadership is essential to implementing reforms, and every one of these leaders has expressed their commitment to moving the agenda forward.

Another example of these changes is the NATO flying training in Canada program. Under this initiative, which was announced last November, industry partners will carry out most of the functions that are now handled by the defence organization. This project will significantly reduce the cost of training military pilots. It will also mean almost $1 billion in direct industrial benefits for this country.

These are just two types of changes, but there are other major areas of reform that show leadership. For example, the Minister of National Defence responded last October to the report of the Somalia commission of inquiry in a report very aptly entitled “A Commitment to Change”. This report addressed each of the commission's recommendations and indicated agreement with some 83% of them. Of the 28 recommendations that were not accepted, most of the underlying concerns have been or will be addressed in a different way than the commission members specified. But they will be addressed.

In many cases the commission's recommendations were already implemented and others have specific target dates for implementation.

The commission of inquiry requested that the minister report to parliament on the department's implementation of the commission's recommendations. In addition to this report, the minister has asked prominent Canadians to participate in the minister's monitoring committee on change, which will report semi-annually to him on the department's progress.

Another important initiative is amending the National Defence Act to allow for comprehensive change to the military justice system. These amendments, which were referred to the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, will help to renew the Canadian forces by enhancing the transparency, fairness and effectiveness of the military justice system.

In fact, following this morning's very productive meeting, I expect a favourable report to the House to be forthcoming.

These amendments, the most comprehensive ever since the enactment of the NDA in 1950, clarify the roles and responsibilities of key figures in the military justice system and establish a clear separation between investigative, prosecutorial, defence and judicial functions. The amendments improve accountability and transparency by creating two oversight bodies, namely, the Military Police Complaints Commission and the Canadian Forces Grievance Board, both of whose reports will be tabled in parliament by the minister.

Implementing these reforms is all about being able to maintain multipurpose, combat-capable forces that are able to defend Canadian interests and contribute to international peace and security. Moreover, these reforms are also about ensuring the trust, respect and confidence of Canadians as the forces carry out these tasks.

Because the government believes this policy stands firm, it has also taken steps in the past year on certain white paper issues, such as equipping the forces. For example, among the various capital investments made under our leadership, the government is acquiring four Upholder class, diesel-electric submarines from the United Kingdom.

The government has also decided to purchase 15 search and rescue helicopters for the Canadian forces. The Cormorants have the power, speed and endurance to cope with the extreme weather conditions and vast distances that characterize Canada's unique and challenging search and rescue environment.

Of course, since last year there has been a very busy slate of operations, both at home and abroad.

I do not need to remind members about the natural disasters Canadians faced over the last year and that the Canadian forces took part in all of them. We have recently sent 50 Canadian forces personnel, including 16 reservists and some equipment, to help fight the terrible forest fires in Alberta.

At the same time as undertaking these domestic operations there have also been changes in the forces' international activities.

For example, just yesterday the minister announced that we are sending 20 to 30 personnel and 10 specialized front-end loaders to Italy to assist in the clean-up of the devastating mudslides in the area of Sarno, Italy.

Last December members of the forces returned from serving with the United Nations mission in Haiti, where they assisted in sustaining a secure and stable environment.

Recently Canada agreed to participate in two new missions. In February the government announced that Canada would send the patrol frigate HMCS Toronto and two KC-130 Hercules tactical air-to-air refuelling planes to the gulf as Canada's contribution to possible military action against Iraq. The government has also approved Canadian participation in a new three-month United Nations peace support mission in Central Africa.

From what I have described so far we can see that a great deal of work has been done over the last year. Changes are being made on every front. I believe these changes have demanded strong and effective leadership from the government.

These are changes that will improve transparency and accountability, changes that will improve the quality of life for members of the forces, changes that will ensure the forces can continue to do the job that the government has assigned to them.

I believe that the government has indeed shown and will continue to show leadership with respect to the Canadian forces and it should be commended for that.

[Holidays Act, May 6th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, on April 23 the hon. member asked a question about the Elijah Smith reforestation fund, in particular about the disbursement of the funds once deposited.

Since 1995 Yukon timber harvesters have been contributing to the cost of reforestation in Yukon. I assure the hon. member that reforestation activities have occurred. In 1995, 100,000 seedlings were planted. This number increased to 480,000 in 1996 and 800,000 in 1997. Other reforestation activities have also occurred such as the collection of pine and spruce cones and the purchase of site preparation equipment.

When the 1995 regulations were implemented the disbursement mechanism was put in place. Under the mechanism revenues from Yukon reforestation fees are deposited in the CRF. INAK is authorized to draw into its budget an amount equivalent to the value of the revenues deposited.

However we recognize that the current process of collecting and disbursing funds to reforestation could be more transparent to the residents of Yukon, particularly to timber harvesters.

To this end Treasury Board people have been working with INAK to establish a more transparent process. To do so legislation must be created, and this is consistent with the requirements of the Financial Administration Act.

INAK is currently working on a proposal to amend the Territorial Lands Act which would include a provision to establish a separate account in the Accounts of Canada. This would enable the collection and distribution of funds for reforestation to be tracked publicly. We hope to put this in place as quickly as possible with the co-operation of parliament.

[Battle Of The Atlantic, May 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Parliament Hill was the scene of a very important event. Every year on the first Sunday of May, Canadians gather to remember the bitter battle of the Atlantic.

During the second world war the supply lines from home to the front lines were crucial to a successful campaign. They carried valuable arms, material and personnel across the ocean. It was not just a simple voyage across the Atlantic. If it was not the dreaded German U-boats travelling in what was commonly known as wolf packs, it was the weather that caused havoc during the run.

For the merchant seamen to cross with the supplies, the air force and navy provided escorts to protect against the enemy. The navy took the bulk of that responsibility.

The battle was costly to Canada; 50 merchant ships and 24 warships lost. Fatalities were almost 4,000 in the two navies and over 200 in the air force.

To our veterans of the battle and to the families of those no longer with us, we thank them for their important contribution to their country.

[Bosnia, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, tonight I have the honour of speaking in support of the continued participation of the Canadian forces in the NATO mission in Bosnia-Hercegovina following the completion of the current mission on June 20 of this year. This follow on force will be tasked with preventing any renewal of hostilities in the unstable Balkans region. Its purpose is to provide general support to the enforcement of the civil provisions in the Dayton peace accord.

All our key allies and the international organizations working in the area agree on the need to extend the SFOR follow on force. The secure environment established and maintained by SFOR is deemed vital to the reconstruction effort in Bosnia-Hercegovina.

I encourage my colleagues to indicate their support for Canada's participation for the following reasons. First, SFOR's work in Bosnia-Hercegovina is not finished and the work of the Canadian forces in Bosnia-Hercegovina is not finished.

Second, Canada has a tradition of responding to the call of the international community whenever world security has been threatened.

Third, we have a long and honourable tradition of participating in multilateral operations. We have served under the flags of the United Nations and NATO and in operations involving groups of nations sharing the same interests.

Fourth, our continued participation in SFOR is consistent with Canada's defence policy. In particular we believe in the importance of collective security and we continually contribute to preserving it.

For many years now Canada has invested heavily in terms of time, resources and personnel to promote peace and security in the Balkans. We have always played a pivotal role, serving with the European Community monitoring system, UNPROFOR from 1992 to 1995, IFOR from 1995 to 1996 and now SFOR.

However the military aspects of the hostilities are not the be all and end all of the mission. The civil ramifications of the military operations must be considered, especially in an area of such deep rooted strife.

The military plans and operations within SFOR have been cognizant of civil conditions and activities. Throughout the military operations thus far it was important to improve public security, fight organized crime and corruption, and promote balanced media. Separating the warring factions was not the only objective. That is why it is so important to continue the mission. The civil provisions of the accord must also be upheld.

For example, the return of hundreds of thousands of refugees belonging to ethnic minorities is presenting serious problems. The political struggle between the various ethnic groups continues to undermine efforts to consolidate peace. In other words the parties involved are not prepared to assume responsibility for their joint future. It is clear that they cannot count on the involvement of the international community indefinitely, but they clearly are not yet ready to go it alone.

Given the violence which erupted in Kosovo in March and which nearly led to war, and in light of the riots which took place in Drvar only a few days ago, we must acknowledge the fact that instability continues to haunt Bosnia-Hercegovina and by extension the entire Balkan region.

In short it is absolutely critical for Canada to extend her involvement in SFOR. It is consistent with the efforts we have made for many years aimed at establishing peace in this area of the world by creating the stability required to implement the Dayton accord.

If we look at the Bosnian situation within the historical perspective of Canada's role in international affairs, we can only arrive at the same conclusion. The fact is that in past years when the international community called upon Canada to preserve peace, liberty and democracy our country always answered the call. Today we intend to carry on this honourable tradition within our means.

Canada has traditionally shouldered its share of responsibilities in the world's hot spots when international security was threatened. Canada answered the call during both world wars, the Korean war, the gulf war and on many peacekeeping operations.

Canada's vast experience with multilateral operations has allowed us to make a major contribution to international security notably in Somalia, Haiti, central Africa, the Middle East, the Persian Gulf and of course the Balkans.

At the same time the Canadian forces have managed to maintain their traditional commitments with NATO. During every operation they have conducted, whether in Canada or overseas, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have demonstrated their ability to fulfil in outstanding fashion any mission assigned to them.

Accordingly, continued Canadian participation in SFOR is in tune with the tine honoured Canadian tradition of doing what we can to guarantee respect for life and human dignity both in Canada and abroad.

In the 1994 defence white paper Canada made a commitment to continue its active participation in multilateral efforts aimed at enhancing collective security. This attitude reflects our national interests since Canadians believe that their own security cannot be dissociated from that of our allies. However, according to the 1994 defence white paper:

Multilateral security co-operation is not merely a Canadian tradition; it is the expression of Canadian values in the international sphere.

In a similar vein, the 1994 report of the Special Joint Committee on Canada's Defence Policy declared:

If we believe Canada stands for values that are worth promoting in the larger community, we must be prepared to invest resources and commit Canadian troops in defence of those values. If we are not prepared to do so, then what do we stand for as a country?

I would like to comment a little further on our participation in not only this mission but in a large number of missions in recent years. Despite a reduction in financial resources and personnel we have asked our forces to do much more with less.

I was on the 1994 Special Joint Committee on Canada's Defence Policy. I agreed then and I agree today that we should participate in international missions. I said then and I say now we must provide more resources. Our forces are conducting the missions, but at what cost?

The Standing Committee on National Defence as we heard tonight is currently studying the quality of life of Canadian forces personnel. We are hearing many stories from personnel about the poor quality of services provided for them by the Department of National Defence. It appears to me that when cuts are needed the military is a prime target, but we must consider the impact on the personnel on the armoury floor and in the field.

I am not saying we have cut too far yet, but I am saying we are dangerously close to the point of no return. We must ensure that our personnel have not only required equipment for their missions but also the support services to assist them and their families in coping with their missions.

I encourage my hon. colleagues not only to support Canadian involvement in SFOR but our military in general. We ask these men and women to put their lives on the line not only for us but for others throughout the world. We must return that expectation by meeting theirs, which is to provide them and their families a satisfying quality of life.

Finally, we should consider the potential drawbacks of a Canadian decision to forgo the participation in SFOR. Failure by Canada to participate in the follow on force would fly in the face of those values that Canadian forces are charged with defending throughout the world.

Moreover, since Canada might possibly be the only NATO country not serving with the new force, her failure to participate would do serious damage to our reputation among our allies.

To conclude I urge my colleagues to support Canada's participation in the SFOR follow on mission.

[Questions On The Order Paper, April 28th, 1998]

Merchant Navy veterans have had service eligibility for all currently available veterans benefits since 1992. In view of this, no action need be taken by the Minister of Veterans Affairs “to make equal benefits available to Merchant Navy veterans.”